The Man of Steel needs to lighten up

Faster than a speeding bullet to the brain… Zack Snyder's bloated reboot is a confused and charmless affair

This is hard work: Superman (Henry Cavill) knows how we feel

Friday night is the prime opportunity to take a break from our ourselves. To let our fantasies run wild, as the child within comes out to play, if only for one night. The perfect time to watch a superhero film, you might think. Man of Steel, Watchmen  director Zack Snyder's Superman reboot, in partnership with executive director Christopher Nolan, is one of the most eagerly anticipated blockbusters of the past few years, due in no small part to a series of dramatic yet lofty trailers. Nolan of course is the big-screen auteur who breathed new life into the Batman franchise by using extended narrative and intrigue to probe the soul of the caped crusader. 

For Nolan it is about more than good vs evil, or staging an epic action sequence. And like him, Snyder is using a superhero to ask big questions about the people he serves; and daring to use a big studio picture to meditate on challenging themes like humanity, identity and morality. This is an admirable approach to filmmaking that can resonate with a broad audience, but only if depth comes before complexity and entertainment trumps introspection. As with the first part of Nolan's trilogy, Man of Steel is an origin story that attempts to establish the hero as an outsider struggling to fit in; the "alien" trying find his place in this world. So far, so good.

Film editors have become so skilled at pushing our buttons over one or two minutes of a trailer, it's almost given that a film like this will attract a broad audience. But would the feature-length presentation hold our attention? On paper, things did look promising: you have the distinguished cast (Russell Crowe, Kevin Costner, Amy Adams and Diane Lane among others), chiseled Brit Henry Cavill, a rising star looking every inch the all-American hero, whether it's hoodie up, shirt off or cape on (he roars like a man too); a loathsome villain played by Michael Shannon (Revolutionary Road, The Runaways, The Iceman, Take Shelter), a man capable of complex and edgy performances of real menace; a director with enough clout and tact to handle the pressure that comes with tackling a pop culture icon; and a producer who knows a thing or two about comic book adaptations. How could it go wrong? 

Well it did. Superman's outfit isn't the only thing that is darker this time round. What transpired over those two and a half hours was a sombre and angst-riddled drudge through the mythology of the "S", pumped up with some of the worst excesses of modern day Hollywood: the 3D gimmickry (a distraction and nothing more); a glut of CGI you can't believe; hyperactive camerawork (the fight scenes were a blur); hollow cameos from capable actors such as Laurence Fishbourne (as Perry White) that barely registered; absurd imagery (who could forget Cavill suspended in the sea beside a whale after saving the riggers); odd depictions of reality (remote tribespeople tuning into General Zod's threatening broadcast on a flatscreen TV in their hut); and the ridiculous script (the premise of a planet-saving collision between two phantom cores stills puzzles).

No one should expect wit and wisdom in a superhero film. Quite the opposite actually: snappy dialogue people can relate to. This was sadly lacking. All that nonsense about the codex stolen from Krypton that Jor-El places in the baby capsule… Honestly, who cares? Then there's that truly cringeworthy exchange between Diane Lane and a young Clark after he struggles to come to terms with his new powers and subsequently flips out at school, locking himself in a store cupboard. "The world's too big, mom," he cries. "Then make it smaller," she whispers. Predictably, more schmaltz follows. The script also overplays the importance of the fact that Superman has two fathers. Of course he feels torn between two worlds; his ancestry and his upbringing. Both ultimately make him the man he is and yet we have to endure countless minutes of exposition on what is a pretty obvious dilemma. 

Russell Crowe's Jor-El holds court in the tedious prologue on Krypton and we are treated to musings like this on man's destiny and the importance of sacrifice: "What if a child dreamed of becoming something other than what society had intended? What if a child aspired to something greater?" Act one and the movie is already becoming far too ponderous as viewer begins to feel burdened by the weight of the world. Meanwhile Kevin Costner is on familiar ground playing the earnest and dutiful father figure Jonathan Kent, who tries to shield his son from the sense of fear and alienation that threaten to consume him. Lines like this thicken the air: "You just have to decide what type of man you want to grow up to be, Clark. Whoever that man is, good character or bad, he's going to change the world." Effectively a variation on Uncle Ben's "With great power…" speech from the Spiderman story. I am all for a little gravitas when we are talking about the fate of the world and how that rests in the hands of a boy that would be "god", but on the back of Russell Crowe's monologues it is just too much.

So where does like leave us? Barely entertained, that's for sure. If this film is about hope, sadly I lost mine well before the second act. I was so excited about seeing an old friend in new clothes and came to the cinema wanting to believe. Instead, I quickly found myself longing for the heart and humour of the Christopher Reeve era (episodes one to three anyway). No, this is not moist-eyed nostalgia. Charm matters in action cinema and superhero franchises such as Iron Man and X-Men prove that you can entertain an audience while still having darker, more inquisitive passages. Man of Steel takes itself far too seriously so it's desperately hard to feel the thrill of superhuman ability because we are too busy worrying about the burden of it all. And when we are given a moment of levity, it's a lame gag in the final few minutes. Army officer to her colonel as Superman flies off: "I just think he's kinda hot." 

In one of several interviews to promote the film, veteran Fishbourne was asked why Superman is still relevant and he replied: "I think he's just as important as any other superhero in our culture. We need someone to believe in. He gives us a way of expressing a need to do more: to protect, and defend, to excel and inspire." Actions usually speak louder than words so why not concentrate on telling a good story and leave the psychoanalysis to the professionals. Let's hope that in the next installment the script writers adopt a lighter touch and celebrate the gifts instead of dredging the conflict within.

Preview: Between the Lines/High Tech, Low Life

Between the Lines, a three-day programme of talks, debates and films about documentaries, kicks off this Friday at the Rich Mix in London. A collaboration between the Frontline Club and Dochouse, this event explores the challenges facing filmmakers, investigative journalists and citizen reporters in the new media age. Themes include subjectivity vs objectivity, freedom of expression vs integrity of sources and authenticity vs creative interpretation. A host of respected figures will take part including Life in a Day director Kevin McDonald, Occupy Wall Street Livestreamer Tim Pool, Truthloader editor Dan Bell and head of news and current affairs at Channel 4, Dorothy Byrne.

Last year Sundance director Robert Redford told the BBC that documentaries had replaced newspapers as the media's main source of investigative journalism. Compare the falling public confidence in media ethics post-Leveson and Savile with the breakthrough international success of personal truths on film such as 5 Broken Cameras, Central Park Five and The House I Live In, and he may just be on to something. 

A documentary used to be niche viewing: either eye-opening discoveries while channel-flicking on the sofa – think moments with Attenborough – or esoteric VHS/DVD pass-arounds for curious culture vultures (La Chappelle's Rize, for instance). Over the past 15 years, these more informative features have become box office sensations: Bowling for Columbine, March of the Penguins, Enron, An Inconvenient Truth, Inside Job, Super Size Me, Catfish, Exit Through the Gift Shop, Man on Wire, Senna, The Imposter; the list is long, lucrative and littered with awards.

Then there is Rodriguez. When a film about a largely unknown musician from Detroit becomes an international success – from Letterman to Leno, BAFTA to Oscar – you know that something extraordinary is happening. Of course, some things never change. People like to hear passionate stories about other people, particularly the underdog. But there is also a growing demand for more depth and authenticity in the things that we choose to spend our time and money on.

Unquestionably, it is technology that has made us so receptive and eager to consume knowledge about the world we live in. We share much more of ourselves as well: mobile phones and digital cameras have democratised storytelling. The age-old corridors of power in mass media – TV, radio, press, government – are being eclipsed by social media and citizen reporters are only too eager to give their version of events.

We crave unmediated information and real-time news from the street. Power lobbies are being torn apart and everyone is accountable. Beyond simply being another form of news gathering, the documentary as a medium provides a way for these frontline journalists to generate awareness for their particular cause and to build a compelling case over time – something that newspapers rarely have the time to do.

Censorship is the great enemy of these truth tellers. So it's only fitting that one of the films being being shown on Thursday 28 February in the build up to Between the Lines is Steve Maing's High Tech, Low Life, an absorbing tale of two dissident bloggers in China, very different characters from two different generations, and yet united in their determination to breach "the Great Firewall", which threatens to shackle the world's largest population. 

Updated

Vegetable seller Zola is a restless, ambitious 27 year old, keen to make a name for himself as a reporter as he covers stories about houses being torn down, suspected murder and public acts of defiance. In one scene he argues with his expectant parents and proclaims that, "the individual comes first, not the country." As he builds his following, his persona – even making an appearance at the World Blogging Forum in Romania – you can tell that he craves the spotlight. But beneath the bravado there is a tacit acceptance of the danger that he puts himself in. 

​An unusually pensive Zola manages to evade the authorities on his way to the World Blogging Forum in Romania

Meanwhile, Tiger Temple, an activist in his late 50s, is a more meditative and low-key figure, committed to understanding China’s tumultuous history while reporting on the plight of farmers in the agricultural hinterland. He considers democracy to be education when dealing with the authorities and generously adds that "we're learning from each other". For him, China suffers from the same debilitating disease that took hold during Mao's dictatorship. "On the surface, things seem better," he explains, "but people still feel oppressed. Tricked by economic growth. Distracted. Complacent because they feel powerless. They ask: 'What am I supposed to do?'" 

Tiger Temple: "In the meantime I will do what I do best: ride my bike. And if I have any thoughts I will write them down and share them"

Zola is less conciliatory. When he finally comes face to face with Tiger at a blogging conference he proclaims, "Being selfish is the first step to conquering the communist mindset." It's a fascinating moment. The viewer is never prompted to take sides but you wonder which approach is the right one for these times after Tiger is then unceremoniously driven out of Beijing while the party conference is held.

At the end of the film we are told that, "In 2012, after widespread social unrest and political upheaval in the Middle East and North Africa, the Chinese government created a new agency called the State Internet Information Body, to prevent disruptions to social stability." The government condemns such agitations as "acts of vanity" and warns that those seeking parallels with the events of the Middle East will "be sorely disappointed".

Unless the people speak out, that is. There is a place for both Zola and Tiger in this fight for democracy and it's going to take many more fearless citizens like them to bring change against a fiercely authoritarian government. Watch this film: it gives a timely reminder of the power and defiance of the human spirit.

And please do spare some time to visit Between the Lines. There are free screenings and events on Saturday…​

​'High tech, Low Life' will be shown at 7.15pm at Riverside Studios on Thursday 28 February. This screening will be preceded by 'Who's Afraid of Ai Weiwei, a short film about China’s most famous dissident artist.